See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/317175296

Polymers for Stabilization of Soft Clays

Conference Paper  in  Procedia Engineering · May 2017

DOI: 10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.005

CITATIONS READS

10 438

3 authors:

Mehdi Mirzababaei Arul Arulrajah

Central Queensland University Melbourne Campus Swinburne University of Technology
45 PUBLICATIONS   471 CITATIONS    345 PUBLICATIONS   5,280 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Matthew Ouston

1 PUBLICATION   10 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Excavation collapse - tunnel collapse- underground construction works View project

Evaluation of Fly Ash Treated Reclaimed Asphalt Pavement (RAP) for Base/Subbase Construction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Mehdi Mirzababaei on 27 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

ScienceDirect
Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32

Transportation Geotechnics and Geoecology, TGG 2017, 17-19 May 2017, Saint Petersburg,
Russia

Polymers for stabilization of soft clay soils

M. Mirzababaeia,*, A. Arulrajahb, M. Oustonc
a
Central Queensland University, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia
b
Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Victoria 3122, Australia
c
Central Queensland University, Rockhampton, Queensland 4702, Australia

Abstract

In this study, the influence of two chemical additives, (i.e., poly(vinyl alcohol), PVA and 1,2,3,4 Butane Tetra Carboxylic Acid,
BTCA on the engineering properties of an expansive clay soil is investigated. The effect of polymers on the unconfined
compression strength of soil samples prepared at maximum dry unit weight (i.e., 16.2 kN/m3 and 17% water content) and a lower
dry unit weight (i.e. 10.8 kN/m3 and 48% water content) was evaluated. PVA and BTCA added at dosages of 0.1% to 1.5% and
0.1% to 0.5% respectively to both compacted soil samples and cured for 1 and 14 days. The results of unconfined compression
tests on clay soil samples stabilized with different PVA and BTCA contents cured for 1 and 14 days indicated that such
hydrophilic polymers improve the compression strength of both dense and soft clay soils significantly and their strength even
increases with curing time. However, the efficiency of the additives is highly dependent on the unit weight of the soil.
Furthermore, the durability of stabilized samples was also examined using soaking tests and results revealed that these polymers
improve the durability of clay soils once they are soaked under water.
© 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and
Geoecology.

©©2017
2017TheTheAuthors. Published
Authors. Publishedby Elsevier Ltd. This
by Elsevier Ltd.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and
Peer-review
Geoecology. under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and Geoecology

Keywords: Soft clay soils; Unconfined compression strength test; Strain energy; Poly(vinyl alcohol); 1,2,3,4 Butane Tetra
Carboxylic Acid

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +61-03-96160626.

E-mail address: m.mirzababaei@cqu.edu.au

1877-7058 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International conference on Transportation Geotechnics and Geoecology
doi:10.1016/j.proeng.2017.05.005
26 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32

1. Introduction

The stability of the embankments is highly vulnerable to the presence of weak water-stable clay aggregates that
may result in erosion during wet season [1]. Therefore, highways, railways and other engineering structures founded
on soft soils may suffer an excessive settlement in wet season if adequate improvement measures are not sought.
Fortunately there are a number of reported and well documented soil stabilization/reinforcement techniques that can
mitigate the adverse effect of problematic soils (especially expansive clays and soft clay soils). Lime, fly ash and
cement are amongst the traditional soil stabilizing agents that are widely popular between practicing geo-engineers
to suppress the swelling properties and increase the compressive strength of expansive soils [2,3,4]. Such additives
generally contain calcium that flocculate clay particles by balancing the electrostatic charges of the clay soil particles
and by reducing the intra-particle’s repulsive electrochemical forces. This leads to adhesion of clay particles together
and forming flocculated particles with improved engineering properties including higher strength, lower plasticity,
increased workability and alleviated swelling pressure [5,6,7]. The abovementioned chemical reactions occur in two
phases, with both immediate and long-term (i.e., pozzolanic reaction) improvement in soil strength [8].
Nontraditional stabilizers have also become increasingly available for civil and military applications. These
include salts, acids, enzymes, lignosulfonates, petroleum emulsions, polymers, and resins. These chemicals improve
the engineering behavior of soil by forming physical/chemical bonds with clay minerals within the soil. Polymers
have been reported to develop a substantial strength improvement effect in clay soils due to formation of bond
between clay minerals and polar end groups of polymer. There are also several commercial chemical stabilizers that
are claimed to increase the strength with less curing time and higher durability compared to traditional stabilizing
additives. However, the constituents of these chemicals are typically neither disclosed by the supplier nor
documented elsewhere.
Ajayi-Majebi et al. [9] reported the improving effect of an epoxy resin (bisphenol A/epichlorohydrin) and a
polyamide hardener on clay-silt soils. In their study, 3-day cured stabilized soil samples with 4% additives showed
significant increase in unsoaked California Bearing Ratio (CBR). Tingle and Santori [10] reported successful
application of lignosulfonate and synthetic polymers for improving the unconfined compression strength of both
lean and fat clay soils. Page [11] reported significant benefit of spraying poly(vinyl alcohol) to prevent crust
formation and enhance the stability of clay soils subjected to simulated heavy rain. Mirzababaei et al. [12] also
investigated the effect of two polymers including 3 to 10% poly(methyl methacrylate) and 1 to 3% poly(vinyl
acetate), respectively on the free swell potential of 3 different fat clay soils. They reported significant reduction in
free swell potential and formation of aggregated clay-granular matrices with the addition of polymers.
This article discusses the application of poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) as a polymeric binder for stabilizing soft clay
soils. PVA is the largest water-soluble biodegradable polymer chain that has excellent film forming and adhesive
properties [13]. It is also resistant to grease, oil, and solvent. It is highly hydrophilic and PVA solutions can be
prepared easily by dissolving PVA in water [14]. On the other hand, water based polymers like polyvinyl alcohol
(PVA) are known to be eco-friendly (i.e., nontoxic and odorless) and are widely used in cosmetics. PVA is a non-
ionic water-soluble polymer possessing high ability of aggregating clay soils [15]. However, PVA-encapsulated clay
particles are still vulnerable to water and may tend to disperse with increase in moisture content of the soil. Cay and
Miraftab suggested to make PVA, water insoluble using a crosslinking method such as freezing/thawing, methanol
treatment, chemical crosslinking, or irradiation. In their study, 1,2,3,4 butanetetracarboxylic acid (BTCA) was used
to crosslink PVA to form hydrogel structures that are three-dimensional hydrophilic polymer networks capable of
absorbing large amounts of water. The results of their research indicated that crosslinking with BTCA improve the
water stability of PVA membranes and make them resistant after water treatment.
In this study PVA was used as the main stabilizing additive along with 1,2,3,4-Butanetetracarboxylic acid
(BTCA) as crosslinking agent. A series of unconfined compression strength tests was carried out on highly plastic
clay soil samples treated with proportionate quantities of PVA and BTCA. A number of samples also cured for 14
days to investigate the effect of stabilizing additives on the unconfined compression strength of the clay soils in the
long-term. Samples with optimum PVA/BTCA contents also soaked in water to investigate the stability of stabilized
samples subjected to excessive wetting.
 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32 27

2. Materials

The soil sample used in this study was collected from Sarina Township in Central Queensland of Australia. The
sample is classified as highly plastic clay, according to the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS) with an
activity ratio of 0.50 and specific gravity of 2.71. The grain size analysis of this soil indicated that it contains 93.3%
clay particles with liquid limit and plastic limit of 74% and 27%, respectively. The maximum dry unit weight and
optimum moisture content of the soil were determined using the modified Proctor compaction test. The engineering
properties of the clay soil used in this study have been presented in Table 1. Table 2 shows the properties of the
chemical additives used in this study.

Table 1. Soil properties.

Soil Classification CH
Specific gravity Gs 2.71
Activity 0.50
Grain size analysis Sand (%) 3.60
Silt (%) 3.10
Clay (%) 93.30
Atterberg limits Liquid limit WL (%) 74.00
Plasticity index IP (%) 47.00
Compaction Maximum dry unit weight ߛௗ௥௬ெ௔௫ (kN/m3) 16.20
characteristics
Optimum moisture content ߱௢௣௧ (%) 16.80
Swelling properties Swelling pressure (kPa) 218.50
at ߛௗ௥௬ெ௔௫ Ƭ߱௢௣௧ Free swell ο݄Ȁ݄଴ (%) 11.50

Table 2. Properties of chemical additives.

Poly(vinyl alcohol) ([-CH2CHOH-]n)
Molecular weight (g/mol) 130,000
Specific gravity Gs (at 25 °C) 1.26
Viscosity 4% in H2O (20 °C)(mPa.s) 16~20
1,2,3,4-Butanetetracarboxylic acid (C8H10O8)
Molecular weight (g/mol) 234.16

3. Experimental program

To investigate the efficiency of the chemical additives used in this study on the compression strength of the clay
soils with different initial void ratios, soil samples compacted to two different dry unit weights (i.e., 16.2 kN/m 3 and
10.8 kN/m3). Figure 1 shows the selected unit weight/water content pairs on the modified Proctor compaction curve
of the soil. A set of UCS tests designed respectively to determine the optimized amount of PVA and BTCA for
stabilizing the soil samples at pre-determined unit weights.
In the first stage, the unconfined compression strengths of non-treated soil samples prepared at dry unit weights of
16.2 kN/m3 and 10.8 kN/m3 with no curing and also 14-day curing were determined. In the next stage, to optimize
the PVA content, a series of unconfined compression strength tests was carried out on soil samples treated with
0.1%~1.5% PVA with no curing and also 14-day curing for both compacted samples at dry unit weight of 16.2
kN/m3 and 10.8 kN/m3. In the final stage, to investigate the effect of BTCA on the unconfined compression strength
of PVA-treated soil samples, proportionate amount of BTCA was added to the optimized treated samples based on
the results of the previous stage. In this study, the amount of PVA and BTCA to reach the desired contents were
determined based on the solution in a liter of distilled water and the solution used to prepare soil samples with pre-
determined moisture content.
28 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32

ߛ݀‫(ݕݎ‬max)=16.2 kN/m3, e0=0.64, ߱opt= 16.8%

17

Dry unit weight (kN/m3)

16
15
14
13
12
11 ߛ݀‫=ݕݎ‬10.8 kN/m3, e0=1.46, ߱ =48%
10
0 10 20 30 40 50
Moisture content (%)

Figure 1. Modified Proctor compacion compaction curve of soil.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Effect of additives on the compression strength of dense samples

Figure 2 shows the stress-strain behavior, strain energy and UCS values of non-treated and treated clay soil
samples with dry unit weight of 16.2 kN/m3 (i.e., initial void ratio of 0.64 and ߱=16.8%). The strain energy at peak
is defined as the required energy to deform the specimen to the strain equivalent to peak stress and is calculated
from the area under the stress-strain curve up to the peak value [16,17]. The UCS and peak strain energy of non-
treated soil increased slightly with 14-day curing period (Figures 2a&b). Figures 2c&d show the stress-strain
behavior and peak strain energy of treated soils with 0.1%, 0.3%, 0.5%, 1% and 1.5% PVA without curing and 14-
day curing period. Treatment of soil samples with dry unit weight of 16.2 kN/m 3 with PVA without curing
decreased the UCS of the treated soil samples. This is due to excessive increase in lubrication effect of soil particles
without necessarily let the additive create strong bonds between adjacent particles. However, the UCS of samples
subjected to 14 days of curing increased by 29% from 549.5 kPa (i.e., non-treated sample) to 710.1 kPa (i.e., treated
sample with 1% PVA). The development of strain energy with addition of PVA to 1% in cured samples also showed
the increase in ductility of treated samples. Therefore, it was decided to maintain the PVA content to 1% for samples
with dry unit weight of 16.2 kN/m3 and optimize the BTCA content in the next stage. Figures 2e&f show the stress-
strain behavior and strain energy of soil samples treated with 1% PVA and 0.1%, 0.3% and 0.5% BTCA cured for
14 days. The addition of BTCA in this study was only for crosslinking PVA polymer to make it insoluble in water
when the treated soil is exposed to soaking condition. Therefore, the strength gain was not meant for addition of
BTCA to the treated soil samples. As it is depicted in Figures 2e&f, both UCS and peak strain energy of PVA
treated samples increased with increase in BTCA content to 0.5%. Therefore, for samples with dry unit weight of
16.2 kN/m3 the optimum PVA and BTCA contents were found to be 1% and 0.5%, respectively.

4.2. Effect of additives on the loose samples

Figure 3 shows the stress-strain behavior, strain energy and UCS values of non-treated and treated samples with
dry unit weight of 10.8 kN/m3 (i.e., initial void ratio of 1.46 and ߱=48%). The UCS and strain energy of non-treated
soil were insignificant and did not vary with curing time (Figures 3a&b). Increase in PVA content to 1.5% without
curing, increased the UCS of the soil by 6.1 times (Figures 3c&d). Curing for 14 days further improved the UCS and
peak strain energy of treated soil with 1.5% PVA. The UCS of 14-day cured sample with 1.5% PVA increased from
6.2 kPa to 116.8 kPa (i.e., equivalent to 17.8 times). The peak strain energy of this sample also increased by 6.5
times. Therefore, to investigate the effect of BTCA addition on the UCS of samples treated with 1.5% PVA, further
UCS tests carried out on samples treated with 0.1%, 0.3% and 0.5% (Figures 3e&f). However, addition of BTCA
decreased the UCS of PVA treated samples significantly.
 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32 29

800 0P 1C 100.0 800

Unconfined compression strength Energy at peak
0P 14C
700 UCS (kPa) 700

Strain energy at peak (kJ/m3)

600 80.0
600
500
500
(kPa)

UCS (kPa)
400 60.0

300 400
40.0 300
200
100 200
20.0
0
100
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
Axial strain 0.0 0
0P 1C 0P 14C
(a) (b)
0.1P 0BTCA 1C Energy at peak
800 0.3P 0BTCA 1C 100.0 800

Strain energy at peak (kJ/m3)

Strain at peak
Unconfined compression strength

700 0.5P 0BTCA 1C 700

1.0P 0BTCA 1C 80.0
1.5P 0BTCA 1C 600
600

UCS (kPa)
0.1P 0BTCA 14C 60.0 500
500 0.3P 0BTCA 14C 400
(kPa)

400 0.5P 0BTCA 14C

1.0P 0BTCA 14C 40.0 300
300 200
20.0
200 100
100 0.0 0

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
Axial strain

(c) (d)
800 1P 1BTCA14C 100.0 Energy at peak 800
Strain energy at peak (kJ/m3)
Unconfined compression strength

1P 3BTCA 14C UCS (kN/m3)

700 700
1P 5BTCA 14C 80.0
600 600

UCS (kPa)
60.0 500
500
400
(kPa)

400 40.0 300

300
200
20.0
200 100
100 0.0 0
0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15
Axia strain

(e) (f)
Figure 2. Stress-strain and UCS relationships for stabilised clay soil with unit weight of 16.2 kN/m 3 (symbol format: e.g. 1P:1% PVA, 1BTCA:
0.1% BTCA, 1C: 1 curing day).
30 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32

140 80.0 Energy at peakk (x10 140

Unconfined compression strength 0P 1C
times)
0P 14C

Strain energy at peak (kJ/m3)

120 UCS (kPa) 120
100 60.0
100

UCS (kPa)
80 80
(kPa)

40.0
60 60
40
40
20.0
20
20
0
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.0 0
Axial strain

(a) (b)
0.1P 0BTCA 1C
140 80.0 Energy at peak (x10 140
0.3P 0BTCA 1C
Unconfined compression strength

times)

Strain energy at peak (kJ/m3)

120 0.5P 0BTCA 1C 120
UCS (kPa)
1.0P 0BTCA 1C 60.0 100
100

UCS (kPa)
1.5P 0BTCA 1C
0.1P 0BTCA 14C 80
80 40.0
(kPa)

0.3P 0BTCA 14C 60

60 0.5P 0BTCA 14C 40
1.0P 0BTCA 14C 20.0
40 20
1.5P 0BTCA 14C
20 0.0 0

0
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20
Axial strain

(c) (d)
140 1.5P 1BTCA 14C 80.0 Energy at peakk 140
Strain energy at peak (kJ/m3)
Unconfined compression strength

(x10 times)
1.5P 3BTCA 14C 120
120 UCS (kPa)
1.5P 5BTCA 14C 60.0 100
100

UCS (kPa)
80
80 40.0
(kPa)

60
60 40
20.0
40 20
20 0.0 0

0
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20
Axial strain

(e) (f)

Figure 3. Stress-strain and UCS relationships for stabilised clay soil with unit weight of 10.8 kN/m3 (symbol format: e.g. 1P:1% PVA, 1BTCA:
0.1% BTCA, 1C: 1 curing day).

4.3. Effect of soaking on the treated samples

For evaluating the stability of stabilized samples against water soaking, four cured soil samples including non-
treated soil samples and treated soil samples with optimum content of PVA and BTCA with dry unit weights of 16.2
 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32 31

kN/m3 and 10.8 kN/m3, respectively were soaked under the water. The stability of samples monitored visually with
progress of time. Non-treated soil sample with higher dry unit weight disintegrated within 30 minutes of soaking
followed by non-treated soil sample with lower dry unit weight after one hour of soaking. The treated samples last
for four days without breaking down. At the end of fourth day, treated samples were removed from water and their
UCS were determined accordingly. Figure 4 shows the condition of soaked samples at the time of soaking, 5
minutes and 4 days after soaking. Figure 5 shows the stress-strain behavior of the treated soaked samples after 4
days. It is evident that even after four days of soaking both mixes are still stable and they maintained some
compression strength. However, the UCS of both mixes approached the same value irrespective of their initial dry
unit weights.

Non-treated samples 1.5% PVA, 0.5%

BTCA, Dry unit
weight: 10.8 kN/m3

Non-treated 1.5% PVA, 0.5% Non-treated 1.5% PVA, 0.5%

Dry unit weight: BTCA, Dry unit Dry unit weight: 10.8 BTCA
10.8 kN/m3 weight: 10.8 kN/m3 kN/m3 Dry unit weight: 10.8
kN/m3

Non-treated 1% PVA, 0.5% BTCA Non-treated 1% PVA, 0.5%

Dry unit weight: Dry unit weight: 16.2 Dry unit weight: 16.2 BTCA, Dry unit 1% PVA, 0.5%
16.2 kN/m3 kN/m3 kN/m3 weight: 16.2 kN/m3 BTCA, Dry unit
weight: 16.2 kN/m3
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4. Stability of soaked samples a) soaking time: none b) soaking time: 5 minutes c) after 4 days.

30 1P 5BTCA 16.2D 1.5P 5BTCA 10.8D

Unconfined compression strength

25

20
(kPa)

15

10

0
0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20
Axial strain

Figure 5. Stress-strain behavior of soaked samples (after 4 days).

5. Conclusions

In this study a series of unconfined compression strength tests was carried out to investigate the effect of two
chemical additives namely poly(vinyl alcohol) (i.e., PVA) and 1,2,3,4-Butanetetracarboxylic Acid (i.e., BTCA) on
the compression strength of clay soils with relatively stiff state (i.e., dry unit weight of 16.2 kN/m3) and relatively
soft state (i.e., dry unit weight of 10.8 kN/m3). The results showed that PVA and BTCA could improve the UCS and
ductility of clay soils significantly. The optimum PVA content for soil stabilization was dependent on the dry unit
32 M. Mirzababaei et al. / Procedia Engineering 189 (2017) 25 – 32

weight, initial void ratio and water content of the soil sample. Addition of 1% PVA led into moderate increase in the
UCS of soil sample with dry unit weight of 16.2 kN/m3 (i.e., e0:0.64, ω=16.8%). Curing of soil samples for 14 days
also improved the UCS and peak strain energy of treated samples. For samples with dry unit weight of 10.8 kN/m3
(i.e., e0:1.46, ω=48%), the UCS increased with PVA content to 1.5%. The UCS of these samples increased
significantly from below 10 kPa to just over 116 kPa with addition of 1.5% PVA and 14 days curing period. Non-
treated and treated samples with optimum additive contents were soaked in water for four days. Non-treated samples
prepared at both initial void ratios broke down quickly within the first 30 minutes of soaking. However, treated
samples could last for four days with a sound shape suitable for carrying out UCS tests. The results of this study
showed that PVA as a nontoxic and organic copolymer can be used effectively for improving the strength of soft
soils with high water contents. The mechanism of soil improvement with addition of PVA involves absorbing extra
water in the soil by PVA polymers to form aggregated soil particles and hydrogel layers between particles instead of
pore-water. BTCA used in this study was mainly for making PVA hydrogels insoluble in water and they did not
participate in strength gaining process. This study is still in progress and the current article is based on the partial
results at this stage.

References

[1] T.M., Peter, D.N., Little, 2002. Review of stabilization of clays and expansive soils in pavements and lightly loaded structures history,
practice, and future. J. Mater. Civil Eng. 14, 447-460.
[2] B.V., Rao, V., Reddy, M., Muttharam, 2001. The impact of cyclic wetting and drying on the swelling behaviour of stabilized expansive soils.
Eng. Geolo. 60(14), 223-233.
[3] Z., Nalbantoglu, 2004. Effectiveness of Class C fly ash as an expansive soil stabilizer. Construction and Building Materials 18(6), 377-381.
[4] R.N., Yong, V.R., Ouhadi, 2007. Experimental study on instability of bases on natural and lime/cement-stabilized clayey soils. Applied Clay
Science 35(34), 238-249.
[5] D.N., Little, 1995, Handbook for Stabilization of Pavement Subgrades and Base Courses with Lime, Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company,
Iowa.
[6] D.F., Lin, K.L., Lin, M.J., Hung, H.L., Luo, 2007. Sludge ash/hydrated lime on the geotechnical properties of soft soil. J. of Hazardous
Materials 145(12), 58-64.
[7] A., Langroudi, S., Yasrobi, 2009. A micro-mechanical approach to swelling behavior of unsaturated expansive clays under controlled
drainage conditions. Applied Clay Science 45(12), 8-19.
[8] Y., Guney, D., Sari, M., Cetin, M., Tuncan, 2007. Impact of cyclicwetting-drying on swelling behavior of lime-stabilized soil. Building and
Environment 42(2), 681-688.
[9] A., Ajayi-Majebi, W.A., Grissom, L.S., Smith, and E.E., Jones, 1991. Epoxy-Resin-Based Chemical Stabilization of a Fine, Poorly Graded
Soil System. In Transportation Research Record 1295, TRB, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.
[10] J.S., Tingle, R.L., Santori, 2003. Stablisation of clay soils with non traditional additives, National Research Council, Washington D.C.,
Transportation Research Record No. 1819, 72-84.
[11] E.R., Page, 2006. The effect of poly(vinyl alcohol) on the crust strength of silty soils, European Journal of Soil Science 30(4), 643-51.
[12] M., Mirzababaei, S., Yasrobi, and A., Al-Rawas, 2009. Effect of polymers on swelling potential of expansive soils. Proceedings of the ICE
Ground Improvement 162(3), 111-119.
[13] Ding, B., Kim, H., Lee, S., Shao, C., Lee, D., Park, S., Choi, K., 2002. Preparation and characterization of a nanoscale poly(vinyl alcohol)
fiber aggregate produced by an electrospinning method. J. of Polymer Science Part B: Polymer Physics, 40(13), 1261-1268.
[14] Cay, A., Miraftab, M., 2013. Properties of Electrospun Poly(vinyl alcohol) Hydrogel Nanofibers Crosslinked with 1,2,3,4-
Butanetetracarboxylic Acid, J. of Applied Polymer Science. 129, 3140-3149.
[15] C.E., Carr, and D.G., Greenland, 1975. Potential application of polyvinyl acetate and plyvinyl alcohol in the structure improvement of sodic
soils. In: Moldenhauer W.C. (ed.), Soil Conditioners. SSSA Special Publications Series No. 7. Soil Science of America Inc., Madison, USA. pp.
47-63.
[16] M.H., Maher, Y.C., Ho, 1994. Mechanical properties of kaolinite/fiber soil composite. J. Geotech. Eng. 120(8), 1381-1393.
[17] M., Mirzababaei, M., Miraftab, M., Mohamed, and P., McMahon, 2013. Unconfined Compression Strength of Reinforced Clays with Carpet
Waste Fibers. J. of Geotech. Geoenviron. Eng. 139(3), 483-493.

View publication stats